TheComeback
2nd Team Getting Their First Start
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,526
- Reaction score
- 1
You are breathtakingly irrational in every post I've read the last few days. We kept five running backs last year. One of them was a fullback. The fullback is now gone. Logic would dictate that this situation would allow us to keep five "real" halfbacks with little to no differentiation from what we did last year. And even so, what does it matter that we've never done it before? This isn't the same league it was even four years ago. We frankly shouldn't be doing things the same way every season.Your dislike of an argument does not invalidate that argument. Also, Faulk is a halfback.
Now, when was the last time the Patriots kept 5 halfbacks?
BB is always about keeping the best players on the team. And while I don't consider BenJarvus to be a guaranteed lock to make the team, it is awfully difficult to find someone who is more valuable.
Also, I do not believe the bullcrap about us cutting/trading Maroney or Morris. We have had too many injuries at the position for BB NOT to keep five halfbacks. All of these guys have a history of injury problems. Not a one of them is eligible for the practice squad. If BB cuts one, he better have a good backup plan in case of injuries. But I don't see that happening.
Morris is an excellent pass-blocking RB, second only to Faulk, and he's a great short-yardage and overall power back. Maroney is still young, showed us flashes when he finally got into game shape by the '07 postseason, and is therefore worth giving another chance given his cheap contract. Faulk is, of course, going no where. Neither is Fred. And BenJarvus looks like he is being groomed for Morris' role.
I would be surprised if we DIDN'T keep five halfbacks. BB is not going to look at the roster and say "Oh, five halfbacks. Never done that before. Can't do that. Unheard of." He is going to do what's best for the team, and I feel that that is keeping five halfbacks.
EDIT: I'll add that last year, we all had the same argument about whether Belichick would keep 5 RBs. The head-in-sand crowd crowed then about how you just don't keep five running backs, what's the point, blah blah, Maroney was supposed to be cut, etc. Belichick kept 5 anyway. Now we are having a lesser argument, since we don't even have to include a fullback into the count. I am 90% sure BB carries 5 RB on the 53.
Last edited: